“He did it. He threw the sandwich.”That’s how the protection counsel for Sean Dunn, the person who threw a sub-style sandwich at a Border Patrol officer in Washington, D.C., this summer season started the federal trial towards him Tuesday morning.The US authorities, Dunn’s legal professional Julia Gatto informed the jury, “turned that second, a thrown sandwich, right into a legal case. A federal legal case charging a federal legal offense.”The case serves as a sure image within the backlash the Trump administration’s deployment of federal troops this summer season in D.C. confronted from residents. The sandwich-throwing incident additionally turned a second of resistance within the metropolis, with spray painted posters popping up across the Capitol within the wake of the alleged assault.On Tuesday, the Border Patrol officer testified about his expertise.Greg Lairmore informed the jury that Dunn “turned actually irritated and began yelling obscenities” at him and different officers that night time earlier than throwing “a subway type sandwich at me that struck me within the chest.”“It smelled of onions and mustard,” Lairmore stated of the sandwich, which “exploded throughout my chest.”Earlier than the incident and after leaving the Subway restaurant, Dunn quickly turned “red-faced and enraged,” Lairmore testified, “calling me and my colleagues all types of names. Saying we had been fascist.”“I didn’t reply. That’s his constitutional proper to precise his opinion,” Lairmore, a division chief who has been with Customs and Border Safety for 23 years, stated.What’s going to jurors assume?As neither occasion disputes the essential information of the case, jurors might want to decide whether or not the sandwich throwing is sufficient to convict Dunn on the misdemeanor assault cost.“Look, I perceive you might all have views of the federal regulation enforcement presence in D.C.,” Assistant U.S. Lawyer John Parron informed the jury throughout opening statements Tuesday. “And that’s positive, we’re not attempting to persuade you in any other case. However respectfully, that’s not what this case is about. This case is about the truth that you may’t go round throwing stuff at individuals once you’re mad.”“When we have now disputes, we settle them verbally,” Parron added, concluding that Dunn threw the sandwich and “forcibly assaulted him.”Gatto argued that the throwing of the sandwich served “as an exclamation mark on the finish of a verbal outburst,” from Dunn, who was upset by the surge of federal officers in D.C. and the Trump administrations’ deportation efforts.“He’s not a fan. He thinks latest immigration enforcement is racist,” Gatto stated, including that Dunn noticed the native federal takeover of D.C. regulation enforcement as “fascism.”Of the cost her consumer faces, Gatto stated, “bodily harm, that’s the usual.”“They won’t come near convincing you past an inexpensive doubt the conduct was forcible,” Gatto concluded.A D.C. jury not too long ago acquitted a distinct resident who was additionally charged with assault for allegedly shifting her knee up towards an officer whereas being restrained after filming the officers as they made immigration-related arrests.The trial, which presiding Choose Carl Nichols known as the “easiest case” within the historical past of the world, is predicted to take not more than two days.